TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1985 (3) TMI 283
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hearing the arguments of Shri K. A. Jabbar, Advocate, for the appellant and upon hearing the arguments of Shri J.M.K.Sekhar, Senior Departmental Representative for the respondent, the Tribunal makes the following Order : 3. The appeal filed before the Gold Control Administrator against the order of the Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Madurai, referred to supra, has been transferred to the Tribunal in terms of Section 82K of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 for being disposed of as an appeal. 4. This is an appeal against the order of the Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Madurai, imposing a redemption fine of Rs. 40,000/- under Section 73 in lieu of confiscation of 2513.550 gms. of primary gold, and gold ornaments....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order now appealed against 5. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that : (1) Notwithstanding the fact that the appellant is found to have contravened verious provisions of law such as Section 8(1), 31, 33, 36 and 55, the appellant being a licensed dealer, the quintessence of the accusation and the gravamen of the charge would boil down to an alleged violation of Section 55 of the. Act viz. non-accountal, and on facts and under law the appellant cannot be proceeded against for contravention of non-accounting under Section 55. It was urged that the accounts prescribed under Section 55 will have to be according to the prescribed forms under GS 11 and GS 12 which do not deal with a situation where the gold and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d SDR submitted that the gold and gold ornaments under seizure have not been accounted for and were recovered from the licensed premises of the appellant. Apart from it, the statement recorded after seizure from the appellant is inculpatory and the appellant's son has also corroborated the same. The statement was retracted on 14-3-1980 after a considerable length of time and no satisfactory explanation is given for such belated retraction. Recovery of 18 chits relating the transactions of gold is a circumstance against the appellant irrespective of the fact whether they relate to the gold and ornaments under seizure or not. The gold and gold ornaments under seizure having been recovered from the appellant's licensed premises, there is a sta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ties either at the time of seizure or immediately thereafter. On the other hand, the appellant and his son have given statements which are inculpatory in nature and confessional in character admitting the contravention of the provisions of law and praying for a lenient view being taken. If really the appellant's brother and co-brother were the owners of the gold and gold ornaments, it equally does not stand to reason as to why they never made a claim for a considerable length of time and the explanation offered in this context is too artificial and puerile to pass muster with this Tribunal. I have gone through the statements recorded from the appellant and his son and I am satisfied that they are true and voluntary. The ratio in the Supreme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....imary gold or ornament, shall be presumed owner thereof unless contrary is proved. The appellant has given a statement on 9/10-2-1980 that the unaccounted gold and ornaments under seizure were purchased from various persons. Therefore, the appellant should have entered the names of the parties from whom he purchased under the relevant columns in the aforesaid forms as per law. The plea of the appellant that the gold and ornaments under seizure were entrusted to him by his brother and co-brother has not been accepted. So the Ruling relied on by the appellants is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case. 9. The theory of illness pleaded by the appellant also does not stand a moment's scrutiny. The appellant has filed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shop and even if they do not relate to the gold and gold ornaments under seizure in the instant case, the recovery of the chits would only indicate that the appellant had been transacting in gold without bringing the same into account. An adverse inference can certainly be drawn from this circumstance against the appellant and this circumstance has not been explained by the appellant at all. 11. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the authorities are not competent to record the statement after office hours has got to be mentioned to be rejected as utterly devoid of merit. Such a contention would lead to very anomalous and absurd situation, particularly if a person were to be in possession of unaccounted gold....